Internet Advertising

Status
Not open for further replies.

BizWiz

New Member
Recently Facebook came out a program that allowed individuals to advertise with them on a cost per click basis. They capped the individuals spending limit at $50 per day for the advertisers account, for whatever reason. After asking for an increase in the daily spending limit, advertisers discovered they could create multiple accounts and spend more than $50 a day advertising on Facebook, although it was against Facebook's TOS. Facebook started disabling these additional accounts, and yet some of the shadier advertisers continued to create accounts. Now Facebook is rumored to be thinking of taking legal action. Do they have grounds to do this?

BizWiz
 
Q: Do they have grounds to do this?

A: The court will supply the answer.
 
Recently Facebook came out a program that allowed individuals to advertise with them on a cost per click basis. They capped the individuals spending limit at $50 per day for the advertisers account, for whatever reason. After asking for an increase in the daily spending limit, advertisers discovered they could create multiple accounts and spend more than $50 a day advertising on Facebook, although it was against Facebook's TOS. Facebook started disabling these additional accounts, and yet some of the shadier advertisers continued to create accounts. Now Facebook is rumored to be thinking of taking legal action. Do they have grounds to do this?

I just met Facebook's VP and General Counsel, Chris Kelly, at a conference. Good speaker too. I can't ask him this question though. ;)

The answer to your question... well, the Judge is right but I'll give you another insight. If you violated the Facebook terms of service then you would likely have problems. It is your contract with Facebook which you agreed to when signing up and using their service. Take a look at them. Whether or not these "clickthrough" agreements are going to be binding with regard to this case... as the Judge put it, "the courts will supply the answer."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top